The Golden Age of Air Travel?

I have observed Interjet, as I've flown a great deal with them. The snack service offers three snack choices. In the morning this means two kinds of cookies and one kind of cereal bar, afternoons and evenings it's one of three types of salty snacks (potato chips, corn chips of different flavors). For drinks there's coffee, tea, milk, an assortment of PepsiCo soft drinks, an assortment of fruit juices, bottled water, and four or five types of alcohol (rum, whiskey, tequila, beer, no wine). All this is complimentary.

All this, also, takes up very little room in an A320 configured for 150 pax. Also rather little mass, all things considered. Now, when flying back from vegas, the snack and drink choices are the same. meaning the planes are loaded with them in Toluca and take no provisions in Vegas. This spares the airline a local catering contract or operation. And this isn't the only route where they do this. In Cd. del Carmen, no provisions are taken in either.

How big a savings this is, I've no idea. But it's certainly something that couldn't be done if a regular meal service, even for a fee, were offered on some flights. Even a simple two curse meal takes up more room and weight.

In larger planes, there are storage areas beneath the galleys. I don't think that's the case in smaller planes like the A320. I've seen the galleys on Interjet's planes, and I'm sure those, at the least, do not contain any additional storage (nor require any)

And I think this is the longest post I've ever written on a very small detail.

If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.

Interjet might, if it can get the permissions or rights, offer a flight MEX-JFK-LHR, serving two cold sandwiches, one on each leg.

It is difficult to say. Although the specsheet of the current narrowbody aircraft from the A320 family says you can fly a distance as long as JFK to LHR, nobody even comes close to that distance. The "new engine options" add another 800-860 km to the maximum range, so they might do the distance (as well as the new B737max).

If they build the Long Range version of the A321 then it might be able to reach from Cancun to Gran Canary islands (but I doubt it).

Interjet's current fleetAirbus A320-200 : 42 with 4 on order and 5 optionsAirbus A320neo: 40 on order and 10 options Airbus A321neo: 10 on order

4,828 km is maximum distance currently flown on an Airbus A320-2004,617 km is maximum distance currently flown on an Airbus A321-2006,100 km; maximum range of current Airbus 320 with Sharklets5,900 km; maximum range of current Airbus 321 with Sharklets

===================I doubt that anyone will be permitted to fly narrowbodies transatlantic to Heathrow. More likely to smaller airports in Ireland, or the minor airports in London. Possibly Manchester or Birmingham. Heathrow is a very crowded airport and will undoubtedly have large landing fees for smaller jets crossing the Atlantic.

I wonder how firm that order is. the rationale behind the single model is to simplify pilot, cabin crew and ground crew training, as well as maintenance. Now, I'm sure there isn't much difference between the A320 and the A321. Maybe no retraining is needed at all and maintenance is overall the same.

But Interjet stuck to the A320 only for a decade. Adding the Superjet made sense for the thinner routes. But Volaris has been flying a mix of A319/320/321 for a decade. I have to wonder which routes of Interjet's are so packed they need the extra room, or where they plan to fly they need the longer range (Canada? South America past Colombia? Europe from JFK??))

Quote:

I doubt that anyone will be permitted to fly narrowbodies transatlantic to Heathrow. More likely to smaller airports in Ireland, or the minor airports in London. Possibly Manchester or Birmingham. Heathrow is a very crowded airport and will undoubtedly have large landing fees for smaller jets crossing the Atlantic.

I use LHR as shorthand for "London" sometimes...

I've no idea what the market is. I know AM and BA fly non-stop MEX-London. AM and AF fly MEX-Paris non stop. And Iberia and AM fly MEX-Madrid also non-stop. All such flights are on wide bodies, ranging from perhaps left-over 767s, to 787s, to A340s and 747s.

Interjet could do some of those flights cheaper, in all-economy, with a stop at JFK, and get away with their lack of catering. I cited NYC-London because that's one of the shortest popular transatlantic crossings. But there would be a bigger market for Madrid.

Whether it would be a good bet for Interjet, I don't know. Let's say each trip takes a minimum of 13 hours, stops included. Then you'd need two planes to service one flight, if you want a daily option. All the while, those two planes could be flitting about Mexico in shorter routes, perhaps earning more money per hour of operation.

I'm not proposing this seriously. But I find it a useful intellectual exercise on how low cost airlines could handle long haul flights without long haul aircraft.

If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.

I wonder how firm that order is. the rationale behind the single model is to simplify pilot, cabin crew and ground crew training, as well as maintenance. Now, I'm sure there isn't much difference between the A320 and the A321. Maybe no retraining is needed at all and maintenance is overall the same.

Airbus says that "the A320neo (new engine option) versions will have over 95 per cent airframe commonality with the A320ceo (current engine option) versions". Most of the maintenance But it delivers more range, much more fuel efficiency, and more seats. Also the price jumps by over $30 million.

I don't know what kind of additional pilot training is required (if any).

Quote: Nareed

But Interjet stuck to the A320 only for a decade. Adding the Superjet made sense for the thinner routes. But Volaris has been flying a mix of A319/320/321 for a decade. I have to wonder which routes of Interjet's are so packed they need the extra room, or where they plan to fly they need the longer range (Canada? South America past Colombia? Europe from JFK??))

Volaris is not trying to fly different models for different markets. They are phasing out all of the A319s and most of their A320s. Perhaps eventually they will phase them all out. Volaris says the bigger planes will reduce their cost per revenue seat mile.

Bigger planes look better on paper, but you have to fill them.

Quote: Nareed

I've no idea what the market is. I know AM and BA fly non-stop MEX-London. AM and AF fly MEX-Paris non stop. And Iberia and AM fly MEX-Madrid also non-stop. All such flights are on wide bodies, ranging from perhaps left-over 767s, to 787s, to A340s and 747s.

Interjet could do some of those flights cheaper, in all-economy, with a stop at JFK, and get away with their lack of catering. I cited NYC-London because that's one of the shortest popular transatlantic crossings. But there would be a bigger market for Madrid.

Whether it would be a good bet for Interjet, I don't know. Let's say each trip takes a minimum of 13 hours, stops included. Then you'd need two planes to service one flight, if you want a daily option. All the while, those two planes could be flitting about Mexico in shorter routes, perhaps earning more money per hour of operation.

I'm not proposing this seriously. But I find it a useful intellectual exercise on how low cost airlines could handle long haul flights without long haul aircraft.

The "Freedom of the Skies" agreement was signed after WWII. For an example it was agreed that Emirates can fly a plane from Dubai to Rio de Janeiro and then on to Sao Paulo and disembark customers at both places. In the return they could embark customers from both cities. But they cannot sell tickets on just the Rio to S.P. portion. But if the two cities are in different countries then the airline can use it's "5th freedom" to sell tickets on just a portion of the journey. So Emirates flies one plane from Dubai to Sao Paulo and a second plane from Dubai to Rio and on to Buenos Aires. I think there are close to 100 fifth freedom flights around the world. Delta has quite a number through Tokyo.

Now what has changed in the last three years is that airlines are using 5th freedom rights not just as supplemental revenue, but the intermediate portion could be more valuable than the passengers who just continue on to the final destination. Emirates in particular flying to Milan and then on to JFK (even though they have non stops to JFK). But there are other links. Qatar Airways flies to LHR and on to JFK even though it has nonstops to JFK. Singapore Air flies to Tokyo and on to LAX. They also fly to Frankfurt and on to JFK.

It is quite possible that with the A320neo that Interjet could have the range to fly Mexico to JFK and then on to Madrid.3360 km Juarez Intl, Mexico City, MX (MEX) to John F Kennedy Intl, New York City, NY (JFK)5760 km John F Kennedy Intl, New York City, NY (JFK) to Barajas Arpt, Madrid, ES (MAD)9120 km total

Now total distance with the JFK layover would exceed the nonstop by a mere 60 km. The values I use are great circle, so the actual path of the nonstop from MEX to MAD may come very close to JFK.

So now the question is how does one class on Interjet compete in comfort and price with both (1) the "premium economy" and "business class" on Iberia, and (2) how much money would the customer have to save to take a layover. I think people are less concerned with if they are on a narrow body or a wide body, but they are greatly concerned

Air Europa, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and Iberia all fly the JFK Madrid route. JFK is the second most popular international destination from Madrid (behind Buenos Aires). Obviously they don't want another competitor, but the question is what can they do about it? I think there is going to be some serious litigation that will resolve this question.

Even besides the airline competition question, there is also the question about the airport. If enough small jets overtax the runways (especially if the smaller jets are owned by foreign companies) the airport authority may take action. Airports in the USA are very limited legally about refusing landing rights to anyone. To the best of my knowledge only Washington National and La Guardia NYC have serious limitations. But their argument is both overtaxed urban airports and national security. However, airports can alter landing fees to make smaller jets much more expensive to operate.

Volaris is not trying to fly different models for different markets. They are phasing out all of the A319s and most of their A320s. Perhaps eventually they will phase them all out. Volaris says the bigger planes will reduce their cost per revenue seat mile.

Yeah, I was surprised the second time I flew Volaris and found it an A320 rather than an A319. I thought they'd go with the same model in their whole fleet.

Quote:

Now what has changed in the last three years is that airlines are using 5th freedom rights not just as supplemental revenue, but the intermediate portion could be more valuable than the passengers who just continue on to the final destination.

Good.

There was a time when Mexican and Aeromexico controlled virtually 100% of the domestic market, and they were owned by the same government entity (Cintra, a holding company). Domestic rates were awfully high. International rates were much lower. If you wanted to go to Tijuana, it was less costly to fly to LA, rent a car and drive it to San Diego, than to fly straight to Tijuana (there were no flights to San Diego, not non stop). There was much talk about allowing foreign airlines in as competition in the domestic market.

Eventually the government gave up the monopoly and sold both companies. Fares came down. They came down further when Interjet and Volaris entered the market.

Quote:

Now total distance with the JFK layover would exceed the nonstop by a mere 60 km. The values I use are great circle, so the actual path of the nonstop from MEX to MAD may come very close to JFK.

But those 60 km also add a few hours for refueling and red tape...

Quote:

So now the question is how does one class on Interjet compete in comfort and price with both (1) the "premium economy" and "business class" on Iberia,

I think Interjet's single class is about as good as premium economy on many other airlines, as far as leg room goes. On the downside there is no meal service, no inflight entertainment and no WiFi.

Quote:

and (2) how much money would the customer have to save to take a layover.

That's the question. On regular domestic flights on the more common routes (ie MEX-MTY or GDL or Carmen), on average I'd say Interjet is between 500 and 750 pesos cheaper than Aeromexico. That's roughly 30 to 45 USD. But Interjet has better seats and better snacks. You also get a bigger luggage allowance included in the ticket. That's not important on business trips, but it might be on a pleasure trip. On a flight to Europe it would be a good selling point. Mexican tourists bring back a lot of stuff from each trip abroad.

Quote:

I think there is going to be some serious litigation that will resolve this question.

I draw the line at imagining the litigation involved. I like courtroom drama, but that's not what business litigation is.

Quote:

Even besides the airline competition question, there is also the question about the airport. If enough small jets overtax the runways (especially if the smaller jets are owned by foreign companies) the airport authority may take action. Airports in the USA are very limited legally about refusing landing rights to anyone.

There are several airports in the NYC area which can be used if JFK gets huffy.

For purposes of continuing on to Madrid or London, other eastern airports would suffice, too. Like Boston or even Washington DC. But there is much less demand for such destination from MEX as compared to NYC.

If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.

There are several airports in the NYC area which can be used if JFK gets huffy.For purposes of continuing on to Madrid or London, other eastern airports would suffice, too. Like Boston or even Washington DC. But there is much less demand for such destination from MEX as compared to NYC.

Looking at Washington DC, BWI, San Juan, Miami and Havana as potential refueling stops for Interjet next generation A320 family, it looks like only Washington DC or Baltimore Washington Internation (BWI) is the most feasible, but may only be possible if the A321 Long Range version is developed. Iberia just pulled out of Washington DC five months ago. United still flies to Madrid from Washington DC and from Newark Airport in NYC area.

-------------It's interesting speculation, but it is still several years away until the longer range narrow bodies become commonplace. BWI already has two economical flights to Europe (but none to Madrid).WOW Air Reykjavík–KeflavíkCondor: Seasonal: Frankfurt

All in all I think BWI would be the best option. There is no direct competition, so a Mexican airline might be welcome with open arms. It is only 70 km further than a nonstop from MEX to MAD, so budget travelers going the full distance may be willing to tolerate the layover to save money. Plus if Iberia just abandoned Washington DC with a widebody, it may mean that there is a residual market in Washington that can easily fill half a narrowbody.

All in all I think BWI would be the best option. There is no direct competition, so a Mexican airline might be welcome with open arms. It is only 70 km further than a nonstop from MEX to MAD, so budget travelers going the full distance may be willing to tolerate the layover to save money. Plus if Iberia just abandoned Washington DC with a widebody, it may mean that there is a residual market in Washington that can easily fill half a narrowbody.

All true.

But.

Part of the calculations in a flight making a stop is "how many people go from point A to the stop?" I don't think the market for flights from MEX to either Baltimore or Washington is big enough. I don't even know if there are flights from MEX to Washington DC. Unlike Mexico, the politically important cities in the US tend not to be very important commercially. In most Mexican states, the capital is also the commercial center for that state. There are exceptions, like Carmen in Campeche, Leon in Guanajuato and maybe a few others.

There is a market for MEX-NYC flights. at least AM, Interjet, Delta and United fly the route (United to Newark).

If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.

United and Aeromexico fly Mexico City to Washington DC at Dulles AirportUnited and Iberia flew Madrid to Washington DC at Dulles Airport until Iberia pulled out

The only 5th freedom flight at Dulles isWashington DC -Dakar on South African Airways

These are the current 5th freedom flights at NYCNew York JFK Milan MXP EmiratesNew York JFK Frankfurt Singapore AirlinesNew York JFK London LHR Kuwait AirwaysNew York JFK London LHR Qatar AirwaysNew York JFK Osaka China AirlinesNew York JFK Vancouver Cathay PacificNew York EWR Brussels Jet Airways

I am not disputing that there is far more traffic at JFK than at BWI. But Iberia pulling out may have left an unfilled demand in Washington DC.

It is possible that more 5th freedom flights will be encouraged to increase competition. Right now the US airlines are looking at Emirates fleet of 136 B777s and 67 A380s which could easily grow to 140 A380s and over 300 B777s and they are shaking in their boots. Not to mention fast growing Norwegian airlines which plans to quadruple their Dreamliners.

Well you have three major demographic groups (1) Business, (2) Tourists, (3) Friends and Family (F&F)

Aeromexico will end up duplicating most of the routes flown by US airlines to Mexico City, as they are often in search of same customers. Washington DC has F&F, but probably a lot of Business travelers. US airlines fly from some hub airports to MC,where Aeromexico formerly had flights but terminated. Charlotte functions purely as an American hub, so Aeromexico never tried to fly there.

Aeromexico flies to Vegas and Yosemite for Mexican tourists. Aeromexico flies to Boston, but none of the US airlines uses Boston as a hub.

Volaris is shooting for the F&F market in the USA, and is going to venture into the tourist market. Interjet has 5 USA destinations.